Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Display - PDF - 2024-03-09T165955.273

    Uploaded by

    bhardwajlawsolutions
    15 views1 page
    The document is a court order from a case involving the State vs. Sumit. It notes that one stenographer is absent and the undersigned judge is also handling another court's cases. The prosecution, all accused, and their lawyers are present. The lawyer for one accused, Manjeet, argues the case cannot proceed against his client without sanction under the Arms Act. The investigating officer is absent despite a bailable warrant, so a new bailable warrant is issued against him for the next date of hearing to argue charges.

    Original Description:

    Daily judgement of the case

    Original Title

    display_pdf - 2024-03-09T165955.273

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document is a court order from a case involving the State vs. Sumit. It notes that one stenographer is absent and the undersigned judge is also handling another court's cases. The prosecution, all accused, and their lawyers are present. The lawyer for one accused, Manjeet, argues the case cannot proceed against his client without sanction under the Arms Act. The investigating officer is absent despite a bailable warrant, so a new bailable warrant is issued against him for the next date of hearing to argue charges.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    15 views1 page

    Display - PDF - 2024-03-09T165955.273

    Uploaded by

    bhardwajlawsolutions
    The document is a court order from a case involving the State vs. Sumit. It notes that one stenographer is absent and the undersigned judge is also handling another court's cases. The prosecution, all accused, and their lawyers are present. The lawyer for one accused, Manjeet, argues the case cannot proceed against his client without sanction under the Arms Act. The investigating officer is absent despite a bailable warrant, so a new bailable warrant is issued against him for the next date of hearing to argue charges.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 1

    31Cr.

    Case5255/2021
    STATE Vs. Sumit
    FIR No. 242 /2018 (Kanjhawala)

    01.11.2023
    One regular Steno is on leave today.
    The undersigned is also handling the work of Ld. CMM Court as the Ld.
    PO of that court has been promoted to DHJS vide notification dated
    06.10.2023 and no Presiding Officer is deputed in that Court.

    Present: Ld. APP for the State.


    All accused in person.
    Sh. Sohan Kumar, ld. Cousnel for accused Sumit.
    Sh. Kamal Bhardwaj and Dhruv Sharma, Ld. Counsel for
    accused Dheeraj.
    Sh. Ankit Rathi, Ld. Counsel for accused Manjeet through VC.
    Ld. Counsel for accused Manjeet has submitted that there is no
    sanction u/s 39 Arms Act qua accused Manjeet and therefore, case cannot be
    proceeded ahead against him.
    IO SI Anil Kumar is absent despite being bound down.
    Issue bailable warrants against him in the sum of Rs. 5,000/-
    returnable for NDOH.
    Be listed for arguments on charge on 11.03.2024.

    (AYUSH SHARMA)
    MM-02, NORTH WEST DISTRICT
    ROHINI COURTS DELHI/01.11.2023

    You might also like